No subject

more for organising your local work, rather than for collaboration
on a set of changes, which is why I haven't given them the attention
until now. However, it sounds like that may be more of an artifact of
not having co-located branches than part of the design.

I have just read http://wiki.bazaar.canonical.com/BzrPipeline, and
I feel like I understand the workflow a little better now. To my
reading it differs little from loom though, different analogy,
"push" rather than "pull", branches not proto-branches. Am I missing
something?

That would then give points in favour of pipelines:

  * currently more actively maintained
  * real branches
  * more daily users (?)

And in favour of looms:

  * currently able to make lp:ubuntu/foo a loom (co-located branches woul=
d
    nullify this)
  * Merging across the set is partly implemented.

Is there anything else you would add?

Thanks,

James